Meredith, not Knox, deserves our thoughts

Now that American Amanda "Foxy Knoxy" Knox has been found guilty of murder and sentenced to 26 years, will we finally drag our attention over to Meredith Kercher? Meredith, the British Leeds university student, studying in Perugia, whose throat was slit. Meredith, the victim, and therefore surely the central figure in this distressing story, though you would never have known it, gazing these past months at the gory theatrics of The Foxy Knoxy Show.

Foxy, back then, still innocent until proven guilty – depicted disturbingly posing with a gun, but also adopting "sex kitten" poses, like thousands of other young girls showing off on internet sites. Whose former boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, was also found guilty, receiving 25 years, yet, who, just like Rudy Guede (jailed for 30 years for Kercher's murder in January), seems to have faded in public perception to the point of becoming a footnote. All of which leads to the question: if there were three known assailants, and Kercher was the only victim, how come "Foxy Knoxy" is still getting all the attention?

The last few days of the trial were extremely strange, with both Knox and her lawyer suddenly becoming tearful, not to mention Knox's 11th-hour flowery oratory about not wanting to be given the "mask of the assassin", making her sound like some ham mangling Shakespeare at the Old Vic.

However, for some of us, the entire trial was bizarre, overshadowed as it was by the brazen "marketing" of Knox, the selling of her to the masses as "sexy-evil". But it is too easy just to blame the media. There seems to be a market out there, a hunger, for this kind of thing. A predilection, as someone said to me, for favouring Bonnie over Clyde.

Even now, debates rage over Knox's psyche ("all-American girl or she-devil?"), suggesting that, for some, there has to be duality, sexuality, a sense of mysticism attached to female homicide. That essentially society finds it impossible to conceive of a bog-standard no-frills female killer, in the same way we accept the equally guilty Sollecito and Guede.

Some may argue that there is nothing sinister going on here – that there is always more focus on the murderers than the victims. Well, not always. There wasn't "more focus" on those who murdered Scarlett Keeling in Goa in 2008 – then all the emphasis (the scorn, the opprobrium) was directed at the lifestyle of this British girl, and that of her hippy-living mother.

Getting back to Knox, some may shrug and say, so the trial was sensationalised, somewhat over-focused on the female protagonist – does this really matter, seeing as she was guilty anyway? I would say, yes. Knox's parents have already said their daughter will appeal – who's to say that Knox won't place emphasis on her "trial by media"?

Away from the legal arena, there are pressing ethical issues. The fact, for example, that even though Knox has now been found guilty, the victim, Meredith, is still barely meriting a mention. Indeed, shouldn't we be asking ourselves – is this what happens when we unthinkingly turn the likes of Foxy Knoxy into cartoons of "sexy evil" – if are we robbing their victims of their humanity, too? Are we ensuring that innocents such as Meredith somehow get lost in the big noisy over-sensationalised shuffle?

Certainly it seems to say something that this trial has been all about Knox, just one of three found guilty of the murder. It is as if, just as Kercher desperately struggled for life, but was overpowered by her assailants, her memory is now being overwhelmed by the relentless "Foxy Knoxy" spin.

Perhaps it is time to banish the salacious lip-smacking over Foxy Knoxy to the satellite "true crime" channels where it belongs. It was Meredith who died – and Meredith who should now have the dignity of our thoughts.

The great soap battleaxe won't die with Blanche

I was saddened to hear of the death of Maggie Jones, who played Blanche Hunt in Coronation Street. Jones, 75, was a wonderful actress, adored by Corrie fans like me for her portrayal of the venom-tongued OAP.

Some years back I was fortunate enough to visit the Corrie set, and ended up in the Rovers Return with Jones, and Malcolm Hebden, who plays newsagent Norris, as they traded waspish asides. "Oh yes," I told everyone afterwards. "I've sat in the Rovers with Blanche and Norris." In this job, I've met global megastars and heads of state, but nothing comes close to those bragging rights.

Just one quibble: with the line that Blanche was "the last of the great soap battleaxes". Unlikely. Soaps have always had, and probably always will have, "great battleaxes". Portraying strong, funny, older women is what soaps do best, and one of the reasons why the genre beats all others where gender and age equality is concerned.

Only in soap, in particular Corrie, are older characters of both sexes routinely placed at the heart of storylines, to the point where younger cast members practically have to fight for airtime. What's more, audiences, young and old, lap up these characters, making a nonsense of "yoof" telly paranoia.

The beneficiaries of this are fine actresses such as Jones, who ended her life on a career high, as a small-screen folk heroine no less. Not the last then, but still one of the greatest ever soap battleaxes, Blanche, in all her acid-tongued glory, will be sorely missed.

Bribing postgraduates will only undermine teaching

How to solve the problem of declining standards in education? Well, how about some institutionalised quasi-bribery – that should do the trick? Or so appears to be the latest Conservative thinking behind the proposal to encourage postgraduates to become teachers, by offering the incentive of paying off their student debt.

Not all students – those eligible would be from the fields of mathematics, science, technology and engineering, who have achieved a 2:1 or higher. Under the scheme, their student loans would be paid off for the duration they remain in the profession, thus simultaneously tackling the problem of student debt and declining standards in key teaching areas. Or, as I would put it, naughty, very naughty.

Here is what the Conservatives appear to be saying to students: "We will keep you racking up huge debts to educate yourself. Then, just as you come to the end of your degree, and are feeling stressed about money, we will come forward, perhaps twiddling our evil moustaches, and suggest you join a profession you would ordinarily have no interest in. Out of sheer desperation you will agree." Quite. Lucky postgraduates, and even luckier teaching profession.

However, not really. There is nothing wrong in lateral policy thinking, still less in a genuine attempt to attract postgraduate cream to teaching. However, this proposal is imbued with more than a whiff of educational wage slavery – from skint students struggling to complete their education, right through to being lured into educating others.

If this rather unethical carrot must be dangled, it should surely be offered across the educational board. Not that it should be dangled at all. What does it do for the self-esteem of the teaching profession that people have to be enticed in this way?

Certainly, there is no guarantee that these postgraduates would be truly inspired by their new teaching jobs, thereby "raising standards". Are foot-dragging debt-oppressed postgraduates even wanted by the teaching profession? Not to mention parents and pupils. "Thing is, class, I had to became a teacher because I was right broke." Be still my beating heart, Mr Chips.

None of this is necessary anyway. There is another way to transform teaching into a kudos profession, attracting the postgraduate cream, and hiking up standards. It's all quite simple really – pay teachers properly.